Godly Women · Traditionalist Bird

Believe in the KJV or be Deleted

Right, because those that are “always learning” (title and theme of her former blog) don’t want to discuss or hear about any other interpretations besides those they are committed to. What she means by “always learning” I believe is to always be learning from those who believe exactly the same things as you do.

What’s interesting is several people asked her why the KJV? Her responses:

Seems to be she advocates for the KJV because of how it makes her feeeeeeeeel. “I love it the most” and personally she feels its the best translation, but if other people personally find another translation to be the best they are deleted and not allowed to discuss.  No logical or theological basis is given for why she thinks its better, she just loves it so you better love it too. If someone wants to convince me to only read a certain version they have to give a much better reason than “because I love it”. Then there is the comment from Stacey who reiterates how emotional and feelings based women bible translations are for women. She prefers the NKJV, again not for any logical reason, but because it was the first bible her husband bought her and it rekindles warm, fuzzy feelings.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Believe in the KJV or be Deleted

  1. Lori today on an unrelated post says:
    “I use a highlighter, pen, and notebook as I am studying along with my KJV Bible which I love the most, the 1828 Webster’s Dictionary (I have an app on my phone) and biblehub.com for commentaries.”

    Yeah, we get it you love the KJV, but why, why, why should others use besides you love it???

    Like

  2. It’s possible. People who don’t wish to do something useful with their lives or don’t have much respect for education often try to overcome feelings of inferiority by looking smarter than they actually are.

    Like

  3. I do wonder if some claim to love it so much is because of the language and that it makes them feel more sophisticated. Because it is harder to understand and read quickly, I think they might feel it makes them superior. Its the simpleton baby Christians who need more “dumbed down” versions like NIV.

    Like

  4. Well, then Catholics are banned I suppose. The King James version was condemned as heretical and the Church convened at the cities of Douay (Old Testament) and at Rheims (New Testament) in France to authorize a translation of the Latin Vulgate.

    (For those who claim that the Catholic Church kept the Bible away from everybody in the Middle Ages, a brief overview of history will show that literacy was rare in those days; education was a privilege reserved to those who could afford to study; their lives were very different from today and it was necessary to work very long hours every day, thus precluding education for the majority. Also, there was no printing press; those who yell about how the books were chained to their stands conveniently forget that every book had to be copied by hand; this was work that took years, and they couldn’t have the books stolen. Hence, why they chained them. It’s very easy to forget that we enjoy comforts and conveniences today that were unthinkable only recently in the vastness of human history.)

    This is a very good history of the Douay Rheims, especially the fact that the King James was condemned:
    http://www.aquinasandmore.com/catholic-articles/what-is-the-douay-rheims-bible/article/190

    Here is a quote:
    “The Douay Bible dates to 1582 for the New Testament and 1609-10 for the Old Testament, and thus the Bible in its entirety. The reasons for the translation and publication were two-fold.

    “First, given the circumstances in England and Europe at the time, it was deemed pertinent that the faithful have access to a Bible they could read and understand, for pious use. This was especially true of the New Testament, which Catholics wanted to be able to read easily.

    “The second reason, which is connected to the first, was to respond to controversial editions translated by Protestant reformers. Around the end of the 16th century, there were about nine complete English Bibles and a few other New Testament translations in English. Many of the Protestant translations of scripture included controversial and biased translation, and were presented and used in polemical ways to support the Protestant schism. The publishing of the Douay-Rheims version of the Bible sought to provide an accurate, faithful English translation of the Holy Bible.”

    Catholics now often also use the New Jerusalem and other editions, but it’s generally acknowledged that the Douay Rheims is the “go to”.

    However, I do own a KJV Bible — it’s an old family Bible even complete with the old Temperance Pledge in it — I come from a line of WASPs. I will absolutely say that I believe it to be a masterpiece of a way of writing and speaking that we’ve sadly lost in recent decades. People used to write and speak in that way, and it’s a shame we’ve lost it. I like to use it as an example of highly polished English and an example of good writing and speaking.

    But, yes, “I love it” is not good enough. That’s subjectivity. I like the KJV too, because it is a beautiful example of the English language. But it was repeatedly condemned by various Church officials. Many reasons why. So I use the Douay Rheims. And no, it doesn’t make me “feel good”. That’s not why we read the Bible, Lori.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s